Weed Management of<i>Amaranthus</i>spp. in Corn (<i>Zea mays</i>)

Vizantinopoulos, S.; Katranis, N.

doi:10.1017/s0890037x00042718

Cited by 17 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1985; Mayo et al . 1995; Vizantinopoulos & Katranis 1998). Indeed, it has many typical features of an ideal weed (Baker 1974): rapid growth, continuous seed production for as long as the growing season permits, very high flower and seed production, and a self‐compatible breeding system.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Size and architectural traits as ontogenetic determinants of fitness in a phenotypically plastic annual weed (Amaranthus albus)

Cheplick

2002

Plant Species Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plasticity of size and architectural traits, and their importance to reproductive fitness, were estimated in relation to nutrient availability in the annual Amaranthus albus. Seeds from seven field‐collected genotypes were used to rear a first generation under uniform conditions. Seed families (inbred lines) from four first‐generation plants per genotype were used to rear a second generation in a glasshouse for 10 weeks. Nine plants per family were regularly fertilized, while nine others were unfertilized. Size was estimated at 5, 8, and 10 weeks; architectural traits were recorded at 8 weeks (no. branches) and 10 weeks (no. branches and branch length). Fitness was assessed by the number of seeds per plant. Because traits were intercorrelated, size‐scaled architectural traits were generated and allometric analyses performed. Genetic variation was analyzed for the second generation among inbred lines of the original genotypes, and among families within each genotype. For fertilized and unfertilized groups, early size (volume occupied at 5 weeks) and branch length per mass were significant determinants of fitness. The number of branches per size explained a smaller proportion of the variance in fitness. Genotype by treatment interaction was apparent for some traits, indicating genetic variation for plasticity, but plasticity of size did not change over ontogeny. Significant effects of genotype on size and architectural traits, and fitness, were detected mostly in the unfertilized group. Thus, selection is most likely to differentiate among genotypes in nutrient‐poor environments. Lengthening of multiple branches increases seed output throughout the season, and genotypes with longer branches per unit mass have a selective advantage. Because early size is correlated with seed output, ontogenetic plasticity in response to improved soil resources allows opportunistic increases in fitness.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Size and architectural traits as ontogenetic determinants of fitness in a phenotypically plastic annual weed (Amaranthus albus)

Cheplick

2002

Plant Species Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…with inappropriate management practices, under favourable climatic conditions for the pest, etc.). For example, Amaranthus retroflexus (Vizantinopoulos & Katranis, 1998), Galinsoga parviflora and Galinsoga quadriradiata (Rai & Tripathi, 1983, 1986a in maize. d High: the species is frequently reported to cause significant yield reduction or other significant economic losses: the species can be dominant in a crop with regular management and is often very abundant, e.g.…”

Section: Assessment Of Spread and Impactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The EPPO prioritization process for invasive alien plants

Brunel¹,

Branquart²,

Fried

et al. 2010

EPPO Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although invasive alien plants are gaining increased attention within EPPO countries, there is no existing widely agreed method to identify those alien plants that are considered invasive and represent the highest priority for pest risk analysis. In the framework of the ad hoc Panel on Invasive Alien Species, EPPO proposes a prioritization process for invasive alien plants designed (i) to produce a list of invasive alien plants that are established or could potentially establish in the EPPO region and (ii) to determine which of these have the highest priority for an EPPO pest risk analysis. The process consists of compiling available information on alien plants according to pre‐determined criteria, and can be run at the EPPO region level, or at a country or local area level. These criteria examine whether the species is alien in the area under study, and whether it is established or not. The criteria used primarily rely on observations in the EPPO region but, if the species is not established, the invasive behaviour of the species in other countries should be investigated, as well as the suitability of the ecoclimatic conditions in the area under consideration. The spread potential, the potential negative impacts on native species, habitats and ecosystems, as well as on agriculture, horticulture or forestry are considered. If the species qualifies as an invasive alien plant of major concern through this first set of questions, the process then investigates the efficiency of international measures (to be justified through a pest risk analysis) to prevent the entry and spread of the species. The second set of questions are designed to determine whether the species is internationally traded or enters new countries through international pathways for which the risk of introduction is superior to natural spread, and whether the species still has a significant suitable area for further spread. If used by several EPPO countries, this prioritization process represents an opportunity to provide consistent country lists of invasive alien plant species, as well as a tool for dialogue and exchange of information.

show abstract

“…Their vigorous aggressive growth and production of allelopathic chemicals allow them to compete strongly against other plants and significantly reduce grain yield and quality (Keeley et al, 1987;Knezevik et al, 1997;Murphy et al, 1996). Besides reduced yields, which have been observed in several crops (Gossett et al, 1992;Klingaman and Oliver, 1994;Vizantinopoulos and Katranis, 1998), compounds that may induce toxicosis and death in livestock have been documented in A. retroflexus (Kerr and Kelch, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%